KEY CONCEPTS IN INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW

SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (SOIS)

COLLEGE OF LAW, GOVERNMENT AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA

GFLA 3133 INTERNATINAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW

SEMESTER 2018/2019, SESSION 1 (A181)

GROUP ASSIGNMENT:

KEY CONCEPTS IN INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW

LECTURER’S NAME:

DR RATNARIA WAHID

NO GROUP MEMBERS MATRIC NO

1. SUKDARAT VIRAKUN A/P EESERT 245693

2. NORSHARYMIMI BINTI MD LAZIM 245167

3. ZAMRI BIN MANSOR 245088

Contents

1.0 Introduction 3

2.0 The benefits of learning International Environmental Law 3

3.0 The History of International Environmental Law 4

4.0 What is International Environmental Law 5

5.0 Principle of International Environmental Law 5

5.1 No Harm 6

5.2 Principle Precautionary Action 7

5.3 Principle Polluter Pays 8

Conclusion 10

Resourse 10

1.0 Introduction

As we know, nowadays with the development of science and technology, the environment is getting worse and worse, and the environmental problem is becoming more and more serious all over the world. For example, cars and factories made the air unhealthy to breathe and among of waste water is poured into rivers. In fact, pollution is already threatening our life. Due to that, it is important to learn the Principle of International Environmental Law.

2.0 The benefits of learning International Environmental Law

The benefits of learning International Environmental Law is the reader will understand who will get the advantages of harmful activities, who gets the disadvantages? who is responsible for damages? And to what extent can compensation be claimed? The reader also can understand more about the different sources of international legal obligation will be as evident that the principles and rules of international environmental law are set forth or reflected in literally thousands of acts adopted at the national, bilateral, sub-regional, regional and global levels. It also educated the people to be aware of the pollution which will affect our health, environment, and ecosystem.

The other important is be aware and understand of what legal action may be imposed on a company or individual who releases toxic substances harmful to the river or in the air. The reader also will know about the interdependence of environmental issues, the effects of scientific uncertainty on international environmental regulation, implementation of international environmental obligations between states at different levels of economic development and the need for effectiveness in implementation and enforcement.

Other than that, International Environmental law (IEL) provide an introduction to the framework, concepts, sources and techniques of IEL, and provided an overview of international law responses to current and emerging environmental challenges which can be practices by the people. The people also can aware about a deeper insight into the effects of natural disaster that may result from the hazardous and irresponsible human activities.

3.0 The History of International Environmental Law

Nowadays, many people are aware of the environmental degradation. For certain places environmental degradation has reached the crisis and can be considered a disaster. Natural resources management has been a subject of international law-making for well over five hundred years. The beginning of ‘modern’ international environmental law dated on 5 June 1972, the opening day of the first UN Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm. Now annually celebrated as World Environment Day. The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, also known as Rio Declaration, was a short document produced at the 1992 United Nations "Conference on Environment and Development" (UNCED), informally known as the Earth Summit. The Rio Declaration consisted of 27 principles intended to guide countries in future sustainable development. It was signed by over 170 countries.

4.0 What is International Environmental Law

International Environmental Law covers topics such as population, biodiversity, climate change, ozone depletion, toxic and hazardous substances, air, land, sea and trans-boundary water pollution, conservation of marine resources, desertification, and nuclear damage (Lakshman D.Guruswamy & Mariah Zebrowski, 2012). It is a branch of public international law which is a body of law created by states for states to govern problems that arise between states. The standards that governments establish to manage natural resources and environmental quality (Global Change Instruction Program). It concerned with the attempt to control pollution and the depletion of natural resources within a framework of sustainable development (The University of Melbourne, n.d.) The past decades, all countries have turned to environmental law to address environmental problems.

5.0 Principle of International Environmental Law

The design and application of modern environmental law have been shaped by a set of principles and concepts outlined in publications such as Our Common Future (1987), published by the World Commission on Environment and Development, and the Earth Summit’s Rio Declaration (1992).

To stop the pollution was the main objective in international environmental law and to realize this objective, it must have a general principles and rules which is reflected in treaties, binding acts of international organizations, state practice and soft law commitments (Philippe, 1995). From this large body of international agreements will brings the international community to have the authorize, practice, act, support and other activities which can reduces the pollution and have a respect of the protection of all aspects of the environment. There are three principle of international environmental law will be discussed which is the no-harm principle, the precautionary action principle, and the polluter-pays principle.

5.1 No Harm

The no-harm rule is a widely recognized principle of customary international law whereby a State is duty-bound to prevent, reduce and control the risk of environmental harm to other states (Ian Brownlie, 2008). It has been identified as the cornerstone of international environmental law. States must ensure that activities within their jurisdiction do not cause significant cross-boundary environmental damage.

On the other hand, closely related to the principle of prevention action, the no-harm principle is obligation which requiring the prevention of the environment. This prevention is required to reduce, limit or control the activities which can cause the huge damage to the environment. This principle is significant for the State which is duty-bound whereby to control the risk of environmental harm to other states because State might be exploit their own resource, but sometimes it may bring harm to other states area. In United Nations Framework Convention of Climate Change (UNFCCC), it has been stated in second page that the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental and development policies, and the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other states or of the areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction (UNFCCC, 1992)

Example, in the Canadian smelter cases whose sulfur dioxide emissions, had caused air pollution damage across the border in the United States. The arbitrate tribunal, in that case, determined that the government of Canada had to pay compensation for damage that the smelter had caused, primarily, to land along the Columbia River valley in the US (Legal Response Initiative, 2012).

5.2 Principle Precautionary Action

Precautionary Action also called preventative principle. When an activity raises threats of harm to the environment or human health, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically (Science & Environmental Health Network, 2006). On the one hand, some consider that it provides the basis for early international legal action to address highly threatening environmental issues such as ozone depletion and climate change. On the other hand, its opponents have decried the potential which the principle has for overregulation and limiting human activity. The core of the principle, which is still evolving, is reflected in the principle 15 of the Rio Declaration, which provides that “Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.

This principle states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or environment, the absence of scientific consensus should not prevent States from taking precaution regarding the threats of harm. This principle is emphasized in Article 3.3 of the UNFCCC.

“The Parties should take precautionary measures to anticipate, prevent or minimize the causes of climate change and mitigate its adverse effects. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing such measures, taking into account that policies and measures to deal with climate change should be cost-effective so as to ensure global benefits at the lowest possible cost. To achieve this, such policies and measures should take into account different social-economic contexts, be comprehensive, cover all relevant sources, sinks, and reservoirs of greenhouse gases and adaptation, and comprise all economic sectors. Efforts to address climate change may be carried out cooperatively by interested Parties.”

5.3 Principle Polluter Pays

Polluter Pays is the commonly accepted practice that those who produce pollution should bear the costs of managing it to prevent damage to human health or the environment. This principle is enacted to make the party who is responsible for causing the pollution to pay for the damage caused by the pollution. This principle is emphasized under Article 3.1 of the UNFCCC. It implemented through two different policy approaches which are the command-and-control and market-based. The Command-and-control approaches include performance and technology standards, such as environmental regulations in the production of a given polluting technology.

The polluter pays principle has not received the broad geographic and subject matter support over the long term accorded to the principle of preventive action or the attention accorded to the precautionary principle in recent years. The strong objections of some countries to the further development of the polluter pays principle, particularly for international relations, is evident from the compromise language adopted by Principle 16 of the Rio Declaration, which provides that

“National authorities should endeavor to promote the internalization of environmental costs and the use of economic instrument, taking into account the approach that the polluter should, in principle, bear the costs of pollution, with due regard to the public interests and without distorting international trade and investment” (Philippe Sands, 1995)

The Market-based instruments include pollution or ecotaxes, tradable pollution permits, and product labeling. The principals have received support from most countries of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and from the European Community (EC). For an example, the Exxon Valdez case. In 1989, the oil tanker ran aground and over 300,000 barrels of crude oil poured into Alaskan waters. Exxon was in principle required to pay USD 125 million in fines to the US Federal Government and the state of Alaska, as well as USD 900 million for a fund to be doled out by government officials for environmental projects, among other things (Piguo, 1920).

Conclusion

The principles and the rules of general application which have been described has provided a framework to shape the future development of international environmental law. Each principle is important and has its own particular role. From what we have learn, precautionary principle is a critical principle and its impact over time should not be understated. The extent to which it is applied at the international level will serve as a barometer to measure future developments in international environmental law.

Resource

Benoit Mayer. (2016). The Relevance of the no-harm principle to climate change law and politics. Retrieved from Elgaronline: https://www.elgaronline.com/view/journals/apjel/19-1/apjel.2016.01.04.xml

Daniel Blobel, & Nils Meyer. (2006). UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE. Halesworth, UK: Technographic Design.

Global Change Instruction Program. (n.d.). What is Environmental Law. Global Change Instruction Program.

Grantham Research Institute, & Duncan Clark. (2012). The ultimate climate change FAQ. What is the 'polluter pays' principle? Retrieved from THE GUARDIAN: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/jul/02/polluter-pays-climate-change

Ian Brownlie. (2008). Principles of Public International Law, 7th ed.

Julien Francois Gerber. (2013). Polluter Pays Principle. Retrieved from Environmental Justice Organisations, Liabilities and Trade: http://www.ejolt.org/2013/05/polluter-pays-principle/

Lakshman D.Guruswamy, & Mariah Zebrowski. (2012). International Environmental Law in a Nutshell. St. Paul, MN: Thomson/West.

Legal Response Initiative. (2012). No-Harm rule and Climate Change. Retrieved from Legal Response Initiative: https://legalresponse.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/BP42E-Briefing-Paper-No-Harm-Rule-and-Climate-Change-24-July-2012.pdf

Michael Oppenheimer, & Annie Petsonk. (2005, December). Article 2 of the UNFCCC: Historical Origins, Recent Interpretations. Retrieved from Springer Link: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-005-0434-8

Patricia Birnie, Alan Boyle, & Catherine Redgwell. (2009). International Law and the Environment, 3rd ed. Oxford.

Peter H.Sand. (2015). The History and Origin of International Environmental Law: Introduction. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.

Pigou, A.C. (1920) The Economics of Welfare, London: Macmillan.

Science & Environmental Health Network. (2006). Precautionary Principle. Retrieved from Science & Environmental Health Network: https://www.sehn.org/ppfaqs.html

Trail Smelter Arbitration, United States v Canada, UN Reports of International Arbitral Awards (UNRIAA), 16 April 1938 and 11 March1941, Vol. III, pp. 1905-1982, available at http://untreaty.un.org/cod/riaa/cases/vol_III/1905-1982.pdf or American Journal of International Law, Vol.33 (1939), p.182 & Vol.35 (1941), p.684.)

The University of Melbourne. (n.d.). Public International Law: International Environmental Law. Retrieved from The University of Melbourne: http://unimelb.libguides.com/internationallaw/environmental